The Playbook Abides - Man coverage at your own risk

That's because in today's pass-happy NFL, in which cornerbacks must play a significant amount of man-to-man, you can't afford to be without one--or five.

Cover corners can make the difference between the simple incompletion you forget as part of the opponent's completion percentage and a made-for-ESPN highlight. This is especially true when facing an elite quarterback like Philip Rivers.

As we'll see in this week's version of The Playbook Abides, Rivers exposed the potential danger of playing man coverage in the Chargers' victory on Monday night.

First, let's provide you with some context for this play. The game was tied at 7-7. The Chargers were facing a 1st-and-10 at their own 45-yard line with 9:32 to play in the 2nd quarter.

This was a difficult situation from Wink Martindale's perspective, of course, because it was both a passing and rushing opportunity for the Chargers. In fact, on 1st-and-10 for the entire year, the Chargers had run the ball just 52.5% of the time. So tendencies weren't going to help the Broncos' defense.

What followed was a classic Norv Turner play. The Chargers came out (after a bit of motion) with a personnel package that I might technically classify as a 104 (1 RB, 4 WRs), although the look that the Broncos saw gave the impression of a run-heavy set. This is precisely what the Chargers wanted.

Turner overloaded the right side of the line with two wide receivers and a hybrid WR/TE at the line of scrimmage. The split receiver simply runs a fly route. The slot receiver runs a deep post. The WR/TE stayed in to block. On the left side of the play, the other WR ran a crossing route in an attempt to occupy the linebackers from dropping too deep into their zones.

The Broncos countered with scheme, that, in hindsight (always 20/20) was a bad match. They called for man-to-man coverage with a single high safety over the top. This meant that the only help Champ Bailey and Nate Jones were going to get was whatever Renaldo Hill decided to give them. On the left side of the play, it appeared as if Dawkins was in man coverage on the receiver. This left DJ Williams in man coverage on the hybrid WR/TE on the right side of the line of scrimmage.

Now that you have all of this information, it's clear why this was a tough play for the Broncos from the beginning. At the line of scrimmage, I'm sure that Philip Rivers was smiling. He knew that the single high (Renaldo Hill) safety was going to have difficulty in picking between Bailey's man and Jones' man. If Hill immediately jumped Jones' man, he could go for the long ball to Bailey's man. If he drifted, he could simply hit Jones' man (Crayton), whom he knew was running the post.

Unfortunately, Crayton got a few steps on Jones, and Williams and Mays--keying on the WR at the line of scrimmage weren't able to get deep enough drops to discourage the post. San Diego, Norv Turner, and Philip Rivers are masters at putting this kind of strain on a defenses. Check out how the play looked live, here at NFL.com.

The interesting thing to me about this play is not that Nate Jones was beaten in coverage. That happens to every corner in the league, including guys like Champ Bailey and Darrelle Revis. What's interesting is the call of a single high safety combined with man coverage. That's because it didn't appear that there was much purpose to it. First, as we can see from the diagram and from the video, there was no attempt to blitz in this situation. Dawkins, Mays, and Williams weren't coming. Jones wasn't coming off the corner either. Second, the man coverage didn't appear to be an attempt to confuse Rivers in any way. To the contrary, the Broncos' cornerbacks showed man coverage from the beginning of the play clock. Rivers has an easy pre-snap read given his knowledge of the routes and what the Broncos were showing.

Imagine if Jones had come off the corner with DJ rotating over. This would have been an interesting wrinkle. Or what about Dawkins and/or Mays pulling the trigger on the blitz with one or the other dropping into coverage. It would have been difficult for Rivers to hit any of these patterns with a play action and deep drop. This would have justified the man-to-man coverage. But here the man-to-man coverage only put the defense in a precarious position. It's hard to imagine that Wink believed that Haggan and/or Hunter were going to apply their own unique brand of pressure on this play.

Obviously, the risk of playing man-to-man coverage in any situation is that you can get burned--even more so when in a base formation. Usually, in order to take such a risk, there needs to be a proportional upside--namely, pressure, a sack, or a bad decision by the quarterback. On this play, I would argue, that the upside did not exist.

Bringing this upside will be part of the challenge Wink Martindale faces for the next meeting.

Related

Once again, I love these posts. One thing though. As much as I love to rag on Nate Jones, are you sure that wasn&#8217t Perrish covering Crayton? I remember watching the play live and wondering who it was but then I saw Perrish getting back to the LoS looking like he just slid into home plate. On second review, I am fairly sure it was 32 and not 33 but I could be wrong.

Either way, I love these. I remember a great block Knowshon had that you could definitely write on. I wish I could be more accurate but most of it has slipped my mind. I am pretty sure it was in the first half and we were lined up in shotgun with 2 RBs. Knowshon was on Orton&#8217s right (I think) and slid to the left side just in time to occupy the extra blitzer on Clady&#8217s side. Sorry I cannot be more accurate, I hope your mind is better than mine.

Anyways, thanks for the great posts. You guys keep me sane sometimes.

Posted by AndrewR0488 on 2010-11-28 15:57:52

Thanks for going thru this TJ. I was amazed how rapidly #12 got into the secondary and partially open to receive the throw. Watching 4 receivers put pressure on the D makes me wonder if there was any pressure on Rivers at all. I am with you - they needed some pressure on Rivers.

I think the way to beat these guys is to keep their offense on the bench.

BTW: I was so disgusted with Jon Gruden&#8217s love affair with Phyllis by the end of the game, I ordered the audio on NFL.com. I know - no more of Gruden for this year - but I am voting with my money.

Thanks again, TJ.

Posted by BlackKnight on 2010-11-28 06:54:11

Hey Cockney, thanks for taking the time to read this post on a day like today when all of the talk is about sex, lies and videotapes&#8212well, at least the last two.

The defense here was puzzling because the man coverage didnÂ´t serve much of a purpose in my view. On this play, Jones got beat, but in zone coverage, this wouldnÂ´t have been a huge gain.

Wink, just like McDaniels, is discovering things as he goes. He´s called some very good games as well this year, although I know it doesn´t seem like it. I don´t think you´ll see him repeat something like this&#8212namely a single high safety over the top of man coverage without a blitz.

Do we have the right guy? Doug Lee and I were discussing this the other day. I think both of us would have preferred a guy like Dom Capers early on, but you know, every defensive coordinator has had to get experience being a defensive coordinator as some point. WinkÂ´s is coming now.

I am actually beginning to enjoy watching him utilize zone blitzing. I wish he would make this a focus of his philosophy.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2010-11-28 05:25:22

Thanks for explanation TJ.Maybe the poor defence isn&#8217t totally on Jones, but on some of the play calling. Do you think that consistency at Defensive Co-ordinator will assist the Broncos in finally improving on D? Or do we need to find the right man first?